In most cultures the birthing process was a female-only club. Men were completely excluded.*8 Even women who were strangers were included while the husband who was the dad was excluded

Both sexes, then, had single sex clubs – each in their area of dominance. Or their area of responsibility Each sex’s area of responsibility was its area of business: women had women-only business clubs; men had men-only business clubs. The difference? We said male-only clubs were proof of male bonding, male dominance, and male chauvinism. And the female-only clubs? We said they were proof of women’s nurturing instinct and men’s failure to be involved with their children.

The first men admitted to the female-only clubs were. . .

The first men admitted to the female-only birthing clubs were not the dads, but the doctors. The male donors were admitted only in the nineteenth century after they had developed anesthesia to reduce women’s pain and breech-birth techniques to save women’s lives. Husbands, who could offer only love and suppon to their wives, were still excluded. The choice to include the donor and exclude the husband was a powerful message to men as to the female desire for a savior over the female desire for her husband’s love and psychological support. The pranice of including even female strangers before the husband deepens our understanding of the discounting of men-as-loved-ones, of men-as-dads.

If husbands had the power, how could they be excluded at all? If women were men’s property, why were men not allowed even to be near their property? If male institutions offered male privilege, why did hospitals (‘‘male institutions ”) exclude husbands from delivery rooms until the 1970s? If patriarchy were a male conspiracy to control women’s reproduct­ive processes, female-only birthing clubs that excluded men were an odd way of orchestrating a male conspiracy.

Did men want to be admitted? Well, on the one hand, once women said, ‘‘Men, get involved.’’ millions of fathers immediately joined, many discover­ing the happiest moments of their lives. On the other hand, if men had really wanted to be admitted before that they could have made it an issue – and they didn’t. Why not? The division of labor led to a division of roles and a division of interests. Which is why all this male-only club, female-only club stuff is not a result of a conspiracy by either sex, but a result of the division of roles.

iioth sexes were resistant to change when their traditional area of responsibility – or dominance – was threatened (even when the help might save their lives).

Today, women are often credited with being the creators of life, men labeled as being destroyers of life. I believe it is more accurate and compassionate to understand that both sexes were working to promote life – women risked death to create life; men risked death to protect life.